If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)

This has been thrown back and forth for the last couple weeks since the DVD came out. The new exchange with the Emperor has how it is possible that the one who destroyed the Death Star could be the son of Anakin Skywlker. Earlier inthe film Vader says "...Skywalker is with them!" and proceeds to the Hoth system.

Some people have been arguing about the continuity error there. We had a brief chat about this over the weekend. We basically distilled it down to this: Vader knew that the young rebel's name was Luke Skywalker but didn't realise this Skywalker was his son.

I can't imagine that, in such a large galaxy, the only Skywalkers would have been Shmi, Anakin and Luke.

Re: Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)

Vader wouldn't be obsessed with finding a kid named Skywalker from Tatooine (assuming that he finds out what happened on Tatooine/moisture farm) who was strong with the force and came to the Death Star with Obi-Wan and later blew up the Death Star if he didn't think there was a connection.

Vader knew that Luke was his son. If not, his brain must've fallen out when he got that massive scar on his noggin.

[FONT=Book Antiqua]He passes to Moses - He shoots, he scores![/FONT]Mummy of the raincoat is a gigantic trollop. DOMINATE!

Re: Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)

To me it's always been clear that Vader found out about Luke Skywalker, and kept it under his helmet from the Emperor. Which explains why the opening crawl says he's obsessed, and he even says Luke's name before he ever talks to the Emperor. The new dialogue is more or less to hammer home the point that Vader's plotting against the Emperor, which we see more clearly on Bespin. I didn't think before that people missed that whole plot point, but when JT even said that he didn't think that was the case I figured the new dialogue is for the best. As for Bespin we see for sure that Vader is tempting Luke about destroying the Emperor and ruling the Galaxy as Father and Son.

Re: Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)

I always thought that it was crystal clear that Vader began having designs on Luke at the expense of the Emperor. But because of the lack of any other evidence, the original OT pretty much lays out the case that Vader wasn't even aware of any children and only began to realize the potential situation after he finds out about Luke (via spies? after ANH). Like I said, there wasn't much to go on, but a reasonable person could have figured out that Vader and the Emperor were going along on their merry way until some punk kid appeared and put a wrench in the whole plan. Offscreen, it's reasonable to assume that Vader put out an order to find out who did it. Then sometime before ESB, Vader finds out that it's some kid named "Skywalker" and the lightbulb goes off in his head. He clearly sets out on a vendetta of his own as evidenced by the dialogue early on in ESB. Palpatine isn't aware of his plans because it is only after Vader's attack on Hoth that the Emperor fizzes in and announces what Vader already knows, that somebody named Skywalker is afoot. So based on just the original cut alone, Vader's plans are exceedingly obvious to anyone paying attention. The new cut theoretically doesn't change that, but does introduce a potential problem when Vader asks, "How is that possible?" True, he is probably just misleading Palpatine, but the problem comes in for that casual audience member who was too asleep to get the point with the original cut. A line like the new one on the surface suggests that Vader doesn't know about this, which obviously flies in the face of the entire first battle sequence of the movie. So again, Lucas tampers with story first unnecessarily and then in such a way that it potentially makes the situation worse than it was to begin with. Would somebody please stop him? Please.

Re: Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)

My problem with how this is being portrayed is that, regardless of whether Vader knew Luke was his son or not, in the exchange in ESB (either original, or new version), Vader and Emperor discuss "turning" Luke. Given that the PT posits that there can only be two Sith - a Master and and Apprentice - why would those two figures discuss, between themselves, "turning" a new, third person to the Dark Side?

Given that the "there can be only two" bit seems to be almost a law of some sort, why would the Emperor agree with Vader's suggestion to "turn" Luke, especially given the relationship between them? Perhaps Vader is plotting against the Emperor, even at this stage, but if so, the whole conversation seems odd. Palpatine has just given Vader information (that he already had, but did Palpatine know this?) that poses a real problem (will Vader kill his son, or betray me?) - why wouldn't he have acted independently of Vader, for his own safety?

And why would Vader, knowing that Palpatine knows about Luke, suggest "turning" him, when the only logical outcome of that is either Vader or Palpatine is struck down to "make room" for the new Apprentice. Why not just say,"Son of Anakin Skywalker or not, I will destroy him, my Master"? Suggesting that he be "turned" has very big implications.

My take is that the "there can be only two" silliness from the PT didn't exist when the OT was made, and this is one detail that simply can't be altered to fit. The fact that the new dialog on the DVD just makes things more confusing and unclear is hardly surprising, since it seems like George is trying to ret-con one detail (Anakin's name, etc) while ignoring the larger problem of the conversation.

Re: Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)

Originally Posted by rbaumhauer

My problem with how this is being portrayed is that, regardless of whether Vader knew Luke was his son or not, in the exchange in ESB (either original, or new version), Vader and Emperor discuss "turning" Luke. Given that the PT posits that there can only be two Sith - a Master and and Apprentice - why would those two figures discuss, between themselves, "turning" a new, third person to the Dark Side?

Given that the "there can be only two" bit seems to be almost a law of some sort, why would the Emperor agree with Vader's suggestion to "turn" Luke, especially given the relationship between them? Perhaps Vader is plotting against the Emperor, even at this stage, but if so, the whole conversation seems odd. Palpatine has just given Vader information (that he already had, but did Palpatine know this?) that poses a real problem (will Vader kill his son, or betray me?) - why wouldn't he have acted independently of Vader, for his own safety?

And why would Vader, knowing that Palpatine knows about Luke, suggest "turning" him, when the only logical outcome of that is either Vader or Palpatine is struck down to "make room" for the new Apprentice. Why not just say,"Son of Anakin Skywalker or not, I will destroy him, my Master"? Suggesting that he be "turned" has very big implications.

My take is that the "there can be only two" silliness from the PT didn't exist when the OT was made, and this is one detail that simply can't be altered to fit. The fact that the new dialog on the DVD just makes things more confusing and unclear is hardly surprising, since it seems like George is trying to ret-con one detail (Anakin's name, etc) while ignoring the larger problem of the conversation.

Rick

Excellent point and backed up by Palpatine's words later on in ROTJ when he asks Vader if his "feelings on this are clear?" It should have been obvious to the audience at that point (if they hadn't gotten it already) that Palpatine had reason to worry about Vader's intentions. Of course, in 1983, we didn't have this idea of "there can be only two Sith," but it was still implied that Palpatine seemed fearful that Vader might attempt a coup if he had his son on his side. However, that doesn't negate the idea that the 3 of them could have ruled together given that fact that Palpatine doesn't discourage Vader's attempts to turn Luke. So in a 1983 kind of world, it all makes sense. But it seems that the introduction of "there can only be two Sith" is the basis for any problems.

Re: Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)

In the next cut of ESB:
"Skywalker? Oooohhhhh . . . so that's why Padmé was so fat 25 years ago! I thought it was all that damn space-chocolate!"

Anyway, yeah, I think Vader was hiding stuff from Palpatine. Seems like they both figured out that Luke was Anakin's son, but Vader didn't want to tell Palpatine, so he could recruit to the Dark Side and kill the Emperor. Palpatine, maybe he told Vader how he knew about Luke cause he just dindn't care about the two-Sith thing, or planned on bumping off Vader once Luke was in the picture.

Re: Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)

Originally Posted by rbaumhauer

My problem with how this is being portrayed is that, regardless of whether Vader knew Luke was his son or not, in the exchange in ESB (either original, or new version), Vader and Emperor discuss "turning" Luke. Given that the PT posits that there can only be two Sith - a Master and and Apprentice - why would those two figures discuss, between themselves, "turning" a new, third person to the Dark Side?

They want to turn Luke to the dark side. There is never any mention of turning him into a Sith.
There are drak Jedi and there are Sith.

[FONT=Book Antiqua]He passes to Moses - He shoots, he scores![/FONT]Mummy of the raincoat is a gigantic trollop. DOMINATE!

Re: Vader: Did he know Luke was his son? (ESB)

Originally Posted by rbaumhauer

My take is that the "there can be only two" silliness from the PT didn't exist when the OT was made, and this is one detail that simply can't be altered to fit. The fact that the new dialog on the DVD just makes things more confusing and unclear is hardly surprising, since it seems like George is trying to ret-con one detail (Anakin's name, etc) while ignoring the larger problem of the conversation.

That's another interesting and valid point. I've touched on this previously as well and went so far as to suggest that Palpatine, in fact, is NOT a Force user himself...at least not until well into the Original Trilogy.

The fact of the matter is that he just flat out doesn't need to use the Force or any kind of "dark manipulation" to get his plan into motion. Based purely on the events in the Prequels, he is using more down to earth (down to Coruscant ) methods of politics to achieve everything. (Aside from the other fact that all of his plans do work but only out of shear dumb luck, but that's another discussion).

But anyway, the reason this is relevant to your statement above is because you're right...if Palpy wanted a powerful Force user at his side then it would have been in his best interest to knock up some other Force User (female) and take the child away until it was old enough to be useful (ala, Maul). But he doesn't...so why not we might ask?

Well first off, if he was really a Force user throughout TPM and AOTC, the Jedi surely would have "felt" his presence anytime they stood near him. There is evidence of this occurring during ANH when Old Ben is hiding out inside the Falcon and Vader senses his old master. That is just one example amongst many. So right there, it is clear that Palpatine is not a Force user himself.

With that idea in mind, that a Force user would give himself away so easily, Palpatine would not want to use it himself nor necessarily be around anyone who does for very long. Yeah, he uses Maul, but Obi Wan's statement at the beginning of TPM seems to suggest that he senses Maul (I sense something elusive). No, we don't know for sure what he's referring to, but given the evidence, he can't be sensing Palpatine. And according to TPM, there are only two bad guys at a time, so Maul is the only other choice.

So while Palpatine is free to run around the government buildings secure in the knowledge that nobody can sense him (because he isn't a Force user), he sends Maul out as the muscle. But then he dies unexpectedly.

Which begs the next question: Where did Dooku come from? Was he also "evil" during the time of TPM? If so, then how does that jive with the "there can only be two" thing? So Palps remains "clean" (of the Force stuff himself), he picks up another bad guy to go out and do the dirty work. But Dooku is old and the suggestion is that Anakin is his offspring. So Dooku would have had to shag Shmi up about 10 years prior to TPM. The order for the clones (presumably from Dooku?) would have come in when Ani was about 10 or 11, which means that Dooku was a bad guy some 20 years before AOTC. But Maul is also a bad guy during that time. The ONLY logical conclusion is that during the Prequels Palpatine is NEVER a Sith! During TPM, the "two" are Dooku and Maul. During AOTC, there is only one: Dooku. Palpatine is eyeing Skywalker to fill that gap. Once he does in AOTC, Palps is free to have Anakin kill Dooku so that he (Palpatine) can begin his own training as a Force user. So during the OT films, the "two" are Palps and Vader...the unexpected then happens when from out of nowhere, it turns out that a young rash horny Anakin produced some offspring which were cleverly hidden by Obi Wan. This immediately gets Palpatine nervous as he figured that he had manipulated the situation perfectly to keep himself in power (with just enough Force ability to do it) and Vader under his thumb (because he stroked his young ego). But now there is another potential Force User out there who will have a natural "allegiance" to Darth Vader. The Emperor has every reason to be scared and begins a campaign of power reinforcement by saying things to Vader like, "I have foreseen it." All complete B**lsh** of course on his part, but because Vader is caught under the spell, he believes it. But he's not so much a puppet because Vader himself envisions a future wherein Luke is at his side and the two of them stage a coup.

The problem though is in turning Luke to the darkside. Can he do it? The Emperor knows that if Vader is successful, he (Palps) is doomed. But the unexpected happens again! Luke takes Vader down. The Emperor couldn't be more elated. Now that troublesome Anakin can be disposed of...except that Luke still refuses to turn. What a stubborn dolt he is! "Okay, fine," the Emperor says to himself. "I'll kill the kid off and keep Vader around a while longer." But Palpatine only had limited Force ability at this point and couldn't control it. So when the change happens in Anakin and he sees the light, Palpatine doesn't have the power to save himself while Vader does him in. Palps never had to use the Force to get what he wanted because subtle politics and ego stroking always worked for him before. The one time he does invoke the Force, it is his undoing.

Now, to be realistic, I don't think that Lucas really had this kind of scenario in mind. This is something that I've pulled directly from the films themselves. Except for a minor gap in the "two" rule (when Dooku is the only one), the rest seems to ENTIRELY explain away any inconsistencies regarding who knew what and when and why things end up the way they do. And it all rests on the idea that Palpatine is NOT a Force user until after Vader is born. To date, there is NO evidence to suggest that this idea is outright wrong, but admittedly, it takes a bit of conjecture and reasoning skills to make it happen.